Bumper to bumper traffic ran in front of the pit. Odd given that NH State Police were letting few cars onto the campus. Most were told to turn around. No one that Republican leadership didn’t want in was getting anywhere near the Carr Center where the debate was taking place.

Powerful lights shone down on the scene from one side — lending it an eerie cast. Behind the fence facing the road were a couple hundred supporters for a few of the Republican candidates. But that was just the first layer. Behind them were about 500 activists with the Fight for 15 campaign — organized and bankrolled for $30 million as of last August by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), whose leaders had bused in SEIU staff and members, student activists, and allies from other unions and immigrant organizations from around the region. At least 13 busloads from southern New England overall, according to the campaign’s registration form for the event.

So there they were. Supporters of a $15 an hour federal minimum wage. A fairly diverse group. Standing in a snowy field on a back road, enthusiastically waving banners — some quite creative, cylindrical and glowing from within like Japanese lanterns — and periodically trading chants with the mostly white right-wing activists in front of them.

Their presence was part of SEIU’s current tactic to raise the profile of the Fight for $15 campaign by protesting presidential debates and other high profile events like the Super Bowl in recent months. Which makes sense as far as it goes.

What doesn’t make sense is why SEIU pulled out 500 people onto a chilly windswept hill in suburban New Hampshire to protest for a laudable reform that their chosen presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, absolutely does not support.

Clinton, like Barack Obama, has come out in favor of a $12 an hour minimum wage. Bernie Sanders, the only candidate whose politics are in line with labor unions like SEIU, is also the only candidate who publicly supports the Fight for $15 campaign’s main goal — a $15 an hour minimum wage. Barely a living wage at all in many parts of the country. Hardly the huge ask that opponents make it out to be. Especially given the wage freeze imposed on most Americans by corporations and our political duopoly since the 1970s.

In response, a coalition of progressive unions and activist union members has formed Labor for Bernie to win as many union endorsements for Sanders as possible. Even as Sanders has amassed a $75 million warchest from mostly small donations — without the truckloads of cash that labor unions have traditionally lavished on Democratic candidates over the past few decades.

With Sanders doing very well in the NH polls as of this writing, and clearly capable of staying in the race all the way to this summer’s Democratic National Convention, it appears that SEIU leadership made a serious miscalculation this election. And the fallout from that miscalculation is already playing out in the very state where they organized the standout for their Fight for $15 campaign over the weekend.

Two New Hampshire SEIU locals — 560 (Dartmouth College workers) and 1984 (NH State Employees’ Association) — broke ranks with SEIU leadership last fall and backed Sanders for President. Both locals were present in Goffstown on Saturday.

Whether Bernie Sanders wins the nomination and election or not, current SEIU leadership — and the leadership of every union marching in lockstep with the worst elements of the Democratic Party — is going to face increasing pressure from its rank-and-file members to stop supporting pro-corporate anti-labor candidates like Clinton. This anger is likely to culminate in major grassroots insurgent campaigns aimed at removing union leaders perceived as sellouts — as has happened on many occasions in labor history. It remains to be seen whether such internal reforms will happen before the major unions collapse under the death of a thousand cuts being inflicted on them by their traditional political enemies and their erstwhile allies alike.

SEIU and less democratic unions like it could forestall the looming civil war in their own ranks — and increase the American labor movement’s chance of survival — by learning from the more democratic practices of the 700,000 member Communication Workers of America (CWA) — whose leadership stepped aside last year and let their members directly decide: a) If they should endorse any candidates for POTUS, and b) Which candidate they should endorse.

This report was produced by the Boston Institute for Nonprofit Journalism and is part of their “Manchester Divided” coverage of the madness leading up to the 100th New Hampshire presidential primary. Copyright 2016 Jason Pramas. Licensed for use by the Boston Institute for Nonprofit Journalism and media outlets in its network.

In These Times editorial staff are members of the Communications Workers of America.The CWA is also a sponsor of In These Times. Sponsors play no role in editorial content.

More by Jason Pramas

Organized Labor is like a battered spouse who must take any abuse the Democratic Party's corporate wing cares to dish out. Like a battered spouse, they afraid to take steps to free themselves (by supporting Sanders).

Posted by Mischling2nd on 2016-02-14 13:11:07

It wasn't really a question, brother. Reaching out to a broader audience and those who support more progressive positions than SEIU is a productive endeavor. It's hardly an "internal problem" when one of the largest Unions in the country sells out the rest of the folks in this coalition--and has a habit of wreaking havoc on other Unions and progressive campaigns. In a more perfect world, you could just do as you say and raise your beef with the leadership and have a principled discussion about it. This is hardly the reality in many Unions. I worked there 23 years and got purged with a lot of others because we wouldn't sell out the members to prove our loyalty to some egomaniacs in the IU. I agree there is a lot of work to do in many Unions to make them more democratic. Until we get there, shaming those who aren't publicly is completely within bounds and necessary to build a stronger labor movement for all.

Posted by Mike Wilzoch on 2016-02-12 23:19:06

The SEIU also sided with Obama in 2009 during the Healthcare Summit that almost completely excluded anyone advocating for universal healthcare. I remember that there was a union split that may have been a direct result of their position in support of continued private insurance for-profit health extortion. Ironically MoveOn was a new org at the time and they too sided with the insurance industry. I'm so glad they have come around since then, and let their members decide their positions.

Posted by James Stone on 2016-02-12 19:48:02

"Why is SEIU supporting Hillary Clinton?" Since that's your question, Jason, why don't you ask your elected SEIU leadership. I assume you're still a dues paying member. You still carry a card, don't you? If you are unsatisfied with their answer, work with other members to reverse the decision. Don't broadcast your internal problem to the world. Asking guys like me about it makes no sense. I have been a member of AFSCME for close to 40 years, but I wouldn't presume to speak for your leadership. That's not what "union" means.

Posted by Ulricii on 2016-02-12 18:40:10

Not a single union should support the Clinton's since Bill kicked all unions in the teeth with NAFTA and had the gall to say the treaty would bring more jobs and better paying jobs. What a lowdown, lousy liar.

Posted by anyone2 on 2016-02-12 17:39:33

lucky you--mine is the seiu.

Posted by viva la migra on 2016-02-11 21:31:29

Thanks Jason Pramas for pointing this out. It's shameful for any union to be in bed with Clinton or any other warmongering democrat. If either Sanders or Trump become their party's candidate, it will mark the beginning of the end of the corrupt political establishment. And unions should be leading the change, not trying to maintain the status quo as long as the elites thrown them a bone once in a while.

Posted by viva la migra on 2016-02-11 21:27:25

SEIU's support of Hillary Clinton hurts the Fight for $15 in the long run. Why would SEIU waste time fighting for someone who won't fight for them?

Posted by teeky2 on 2016-02-11 19:03:30

Yay for the CWA! (My union!)

Posted by Marsh_Owl on 2016-02-11 13:40:24

"This anger is likely to culminate in major grassroots insurgent campaigns aimed at removing union leaders perceived as sellouts — as has happened on many occasions in labor history." WHEN?! Just show up this Friday at their offices and stage a sit-in, and throw the bums OUT! Join the REVOLUTION! or be left in the dustbin of history...

Posted by Eduardo Viga on 2016-02-10 00:35:16

So, who choose HRC at SEIU? Put their pictures in a MEME and shame them! AND VOTE THEM OUT!!! Who's running against them and where do I send my donation? ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Posted by Eduardo Viga on 2016-02-10 00:22:50

The SEIU can hardly be called a democratic union. Their conventions where officers are elected and programs adopted are completely rigged and delegates' conformity "vigorously" enforced. There is an ever fainter hint of rank and file involvement in evidence. Since the train wreck of Andy Stern (incredibly, still their President Emeritus) and many of the same IU members, including President Mary Kay Henry, ruthlessly silencing dissent from the ranks while they attacked other unions in years past, they have consolidated even more power in DC. It should surprise no one that leaders like these feel common cause with the autocratic center of the Democratic Party. This rancid alliance of ruling elites supersedes even the concept of "allowing" the members who pay the freight (and don't even have a vote for leadership of their own union) to choose who their union should support for President.

Posted by Mike Wilzoch on 2016-02-09 18:09:51

More of the same! Establishment is trying to hang on as best they can so they can keep on bilking the middle class and poor! I guess they want the pitchforks!

Posted by DmonCeede on 2016-02-09 11:58:42

About this Blog

"Working In These Times" is dedicated to providing independent and incisive coverage of the labor movement and the struggles of workers to obtain safe, healthy and just workplaces. more